About your Search

20130801
20130831
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
is paul and fred townson, a member of the dhs and cia external advisory boards and dana bash and jill. jill, what are you hearing about this world-wide alert, 21 posts close in 17 countries. how credible a threat is this? >> they believe that it definitely is credible. they are taking it seriously. in fact, they say the number of countries where the embassies and consulates are being temporary shut down could increase in the length of time in which they are shut down could increase, as well. now what they are saying is in light of benghazi, they out of an abundance of caution are taking these steps. it refers to routine things that happen at the embassy, giving passports, et cetera but say for americans, if there is an emergency, they can get in touch with the embassy. that is not a problem. but they are also, anderson, urging americans if they are traveling to that region to register if this program, step. you can find it on their website and you can get texts and e-mail messages realtime about the threat that's out there and anything happening, country specific. >> jill, britain is
strings. >> a lot to talk about with david gergen, chief white house correspondent jessica yellin and dana bash. jessica, we heard the president make this a promise that it's going to become more transparent. he says it was already happening before the snowden leaks. but is that really realistic? >> well, as you point out, wolf, he did say that he wanted more transparency back in may. he said that. that was right before edward snowden's first leak was in june. so his assertion is that the snowden leaks just sped up a process that was going to happen any way. well, we also have to take a bigger look at the big picture, which is did snowden actually lead to these new safeguards he put in place? we know that two democratic senators have been calling for more transparency and even reforms for more than a year now. sn when the head of the intelligence community went before congress, he's admitted now that he was less than truthful in talking about them. so that was all before snowden. would this have happened without snowden? we can't know, the train has left the station, but it does seem to ha
, as opposed to the nsa surveillance program. dana, what is the reaction on capitol hill? i know the lawmakers are in recess, on vacation, the president is going on vacation tomorrow but we saw what speaker bayner said, suggesting the president was concerned about saving face than defending the programs. >> that's right. look, i mean, this is kind of the one issue or few issues, i should say where republicans are supportive of the president. this nsa program they say has been helpful and they have been kind of his biggest cheerleaders on this while the democrats, many of the democrats, as jessica was just talking to, leading liberal democratic senators have been maybe the most vocal in terms of criticism. this changed that a little bit. but one thing i would say about peter king, one of the lawmakers you were talking about, he said the president is on an apology tour. that illustrates the flight within the republican party because peter king, as you know is making noise about being president and he's trying to push the wing of the republican party that is more hockish against those on the repu
they wrapped up a conference call. more from dana bash. this conference between the white house and members of congress, what do you know about it? >> i just talked to a lawmaker on that call and it lasted for more than an hour, close to an hour and a half and the gist of the administration's message is what we've heard publicly, they believe that assad's regime did use chemical weapons, that was the main message. they insisted that no decision has been made with regard to military action. there is no timetable on what or when that would be, but i'm also told even though there were 20 to 25 people of both parties on this call with administration officials, the secretaries of state and defense and others, it wasn't antagonistic. i'm told it was a good discussion. they listened to everybody's opinions, the opinions i'm sure as you suspect were varied but nobody said don't do it. one of the questions i had, was what the effect in great britain would be on members of congress. the answer that obama officials gave is that the u.s. is going to do what it needs to do, and another country will not
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)